Mazda 6 Forums banner

21 - 33 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
I regard the consumer reviews and consumer surveys at Tire Rack, which generally have the characteristics that suggest that they are mostly the product of 'bots, to be all-but-worthless.

Brian, you stand on the shoulders of a giant. His name was Ettore Bugatti; yes, THE Bugatti, whose namesake automobiles are among the fastest in the world even in 2019. When it was observed that brakes were practically non-existent on his cars, Bugatti replied:

source URL: Ettore Bugatti Quotes

Fitting all-season tires to drive in the Houston weather that you describe suggests that you are Bugatti's spiritual landsman. :smile2:
You have your opinion and I have mine. Do what you want with it, it's STILL a free country!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
What kinda garbage is that?
It is fact-based. Your comment is ignorance-based. Note: unlike stupidity, ignorance can be cured; read on and you may find the path to a cure.

Get an ultra performance All Season tires like . . .
The phrase "ultra performance All Season tire" is an oxymoron, like "high quality garbage."

the General G-Max AS-05 and you’ll be fine.
Continental AG, the parent company of General Tire, makes some excellent tires. Continental's better tires bear the Continental brand; the General Tire line comprises Continental's lower grade tires; General tires are a more appropriate match for a Scion (Toyota's economy line) than for a Lexus (Toyota's premium line); I would not seek out General tires for a Mazda6. I certainly would not seek out an All Season tire for use in any area that sees rainy conditions a good portion of the year.

I spent a significant portion of my professional career as outside counsel (a lawyer who is not in-house as a part of the client's legal department; outside counsel are hired for expertise that the client perceives that the company's in-house lawyers are inadequate to address) for a very major tire retailer. A good business lawyer — and I was at the very top of my profession — gets to know his (or her) client's businesses better than the clients know themselves; that is the way a good lawyer gains client loyalty and has clients return again and again for more advice.

Among the open secrets within the tire industry is the knowledge that so-called All Season tires are significantly inferior to non-AS tires (there is no industry standard term for what marketing types deceptively call "summer tires") in wet traction (emergency braking on wet surfaces). Typically, an all-season tire will exhibit stopping distances as much as 40 percent longer than the stopping distances of an non-AS tire in emergency braking situations on wet pavement.

Consider, for a start, the following data points. Many tire makers make parallel offerings of popular tires in their line, a performance tire and an AS line, which often have similar tread patterns and similar advertising copy. However, invariably — you will not find an exception — the performance tire will be significantly more expensive than the AS tire, and, again without exception, the AS tire will have a significantly higher UTQG Treadwear grade than the parallel performance tire. Stop. Think about that: Why does the tire maker think (apparently correctly, else it would stop making the performance variant) that it can charge more for a tire that is going to wear out more quickly? Simplified answer: the expensive variant is targeted at the driver who is concerned with safety, while the AS variant is targeted at drivers who are cheap and will cut corners to save a few dollars.

EXAMPLE: The Nokian zLine tire, made by a Finnish company at a factory in Russia. which is one of the best tires that you can fit to a Mazda6. The street price per tire of one Nokian zLine tire in 215/50R 17XL size is $151, and the tire has a UTQG Treadwear grade of 300. The parallel Nokian zLine A/S tire, in the same size, 215/50R 17XL, has a street price of $104 (45 percent less per tire) and a UTQG Treadwear grade of 500 (60 percent greater per tire) . Why do knowledgeable purchasers (like me) willingly paying more for less wear? Because safety is my first concern when fitting tires to my car.

I just bought a set for my 2015 Mazda 6 and they are amazing in the wet.
"Amazing" is an interesting choice of word. If you live long enough, and drive a lot in varied circumstances, you will encounter a few occasions when every inch counts in your ability to stop. I first obtained my driver's license toward the end of the Eisenhower Administration, and have put more than 10,000 miles on the odometer almost every year since. Off hand, I can recall four instances when I experienced "amazing" wet-pavement performance from my tires:

  1. I was driving north in a drizzle on a freeway that was renamed the Major Deegan Expressway in the vicinity of Yankee Stadium on a light-traffic Sunday morning when, about 75 yards in front of me, an 18-wheeler got out of control and ended up under an overpass, wedged sideways, blocking all of the northbound lanes. I braked hard, simultaneously swerving toward the (narrow) right shoulder. Another driver, following me, apparently did not see the situation ahead as soon as I did, and he came around to my left, saw the truck just as he was passing me, and jammed on his brakes. He slammed into the trailer under the underpass; I ended up on the shoulder, and my vehicle was undamaged.
  2. I came around a large radius turn in the mountains here in Oregon to see that the entire roadway ahead had slid down the side of the hill (landslide), leaving a gaping chasm. I was able to stop, just barely, short of the edge. There is no doubt in my mind that, had I had your General G-Max AS tires on my car, the performance would have been "amazing," because I would have had to learn (in a hurry) how to fly the car without wings or ailerons. Yeah. Amazing.
  3. Early (3:30 or 4:00 a.m.) on a December morning here in Portland, I was giving a friend a ride to the airport to catch an early morning flight to the East Coast. Portland, December: yeah, it rains. Heading east on the Banfield (I-84) from downtown Portland, a truck came down an on-ramp ahead of me to get onto the freeway in my lane; it was a junk scavenger truck, with an cargo bay full (to the overflowing) with random pieces of scrap metal, discarded appliances, etc. As the truck merged into my lane, a length of angle iron, about 6 feet long and 8-10 inches across, fell off the top of the pile at the back of the truck, and landed, end on, on the pavement ahead of me, whence it bounced about ten feet back up into the air. Had I not taken my foot off the accelerator when first I saw the truck merging onto the freeway, that piece of iron would have passed through my windshield and neatly skewered me; as it was, I was only two to three car lengths behind the truck, barely enough space for me to execute an emergency maneuver and go around the left side of the truck. As you may guess from the length and detail of this message, I am a fanatic about the quality of the tires that I fit to our Mazda6, and, because my tires gave me full control, I executed the maneuver quickly and deftly. I seriously doubt that I would have been able to do so had I had your economy General AS tires on my Mazda6.
  4. We were tooling along at about 45mph on a paved Forest Service road south of Mt. St. Helens in the early 1970s when a motorcyclist (who I assume had gone off the road to take a pee behind a tree), without looking, manually pushed his bike onto the road. I slammed the brakes on hard and they locked (I was driving a Saab 99 at the time, manufactured before the invention of ABS); the car ended up facing sideways, with my driver's door closest to the motorcycle, but when I say "closest," I mean between 6 inches and a foot from the guy's left elbow. There is no substitute for stopping power.
Go to Tire-rack and watch their video review
TireRack is an interesting case (they sold fewer tires than my client did, if that matters). I have purchased tires from TireRack myself in the past, and the website presents an interesting reference point even if one purchases tires elsewhere. Their group tests, in particular, usually featuring four or five tires of the same size, fitted to the same vehicle, tested under the same conditions on the same day by the same testers, are especially interesting. Do not try to compare numerical results between two test groups, however, because (as you will find if you pay attention) there can be a very wide variance between the test results for a specific test of the same model and size of a brand of tire from grouping to grouping, presumably due to different weather conditions, different vehicles, and different testers. Look at each group test as a universe of its own, and the results are more worthy of reliance.

I trust that TireRack is not dishonest; I think that it does not fudge results. That said, however, when you get away from the comparison tests with hard data, the copy on the site gets squirrelly. According to the individual tire descriptions, every tire that TireRack sells on its site is better than every other tire that TireRack sells on its site. There are only wonderful tires and better-than-wonderful tires and even-better-than-that tires for sale there; there is no paucity of superlatives.

Moreover, there are some very misleading and potentially dangerous statements on the site. Apparently, there is a macro that TireRack has programmed into every keyboard at the company that says that what TireRack calls a "summer" tire (see above) should not be driven in sub-freezing conditions on dry roads.

Here is the deception in that statement: every rubber compound in every tire gets softer as the tire gets hotter, and gets harder as the tire gets colder. At a very moderate temperature, say 50° F., the tread compound of almost every all-season tire is harder than the tread compound of most general purpose (non-AS) tires; compounding the tread to be hard is one of the techniques that confers long tread life, which is an important consideration for customers for whom cheap-cheap-cheap is the first buying consideration; and basically that is the target audience for all-season tires. The countervailing consideration is that, the harder the tread compound, generally the poorer the traction (braking distance) a tire will have.

It would be possible to make tires with UTQG Treadwear gradings into the thousands if the steel belts in the tires were a bit thicker, and were on the outside of the tire, but the tires would be noisy, would not ride very well, and (most importantly for our discussion) would not brake well. OTOH, a tire with a tread compound that was soft like an art gum eraser would be terrific at braking, but you would have to change out your tires after every hard stop. Most of the cars at the Indy 500 (which hardly have the brakes applied at all), undergo a tire swap during the race, and that is for a race only 500 miles long.

Now, although there are some differences in the breadth of the range within which tires are at a "good" softness/hardness, a tire with a tread compound that is harder at 50° (for instance, all-season) also will be harder at freezing (32°) temperature; and a tire with a tread compound that is softer at 50° (non-AS) will still have a softer tread compound at 32° than the all-season tire; consequently the non-all-season tire usually exhibits better braking traction and handling, than a typical AS tire at temperatures near freezing.

Finally — and this is a whole can of worms that needs a separate thread of its own — unless NHTSA recently has amended the UTQG testing protocol for Traction, which relates specifically to wet braking, since last I checked — is completely irrelevant for cars equipped with antilock braking systems (ABS) — that is, most modern cars — and all Mazda6's. The test procedure specifies that the tester throw a chuck into the wheel of a trailer on which the tire under test is mounted, in order to lock the wheel and tire instantly and to completely stop rotation. The entire function of ABS is to prevent wheel lock, and it instantly releases the vehicle's braking on that wheel until the wheel resumes rotation; so the UTQG Traction tests specifically in a condition (locked wheel) that never should occur at all in a modern vehicle.
So you're a test driveing chemist engineering lawyer who specializes in tyres.

What a load of horse manure.

The fact that you felt the need to say lawyer more 5han once was enough to convince me that you just like being on your soapbox. Tell us, what tires you have personally tested in myriads of weather conditions? Do that and then I might be inclined to think about hearing you out.


Stop grandstand like you're the be all 3nd all of tires.

You haven't said anything to help the thread starter. All you have done is attach everyone with an opinion like the shark you are.

You've not stated any useful information to educate anyone. We all live in different parts of the world with different weather conditions and road conditions. You don't speak for everyone.

Got test a few hundred tires in various weather and road conditions and then we'll listen to you.

Meanwhile just shut up!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
For what it's worth, I bought my 2015 Mazda6 GT-T as a CPO in Sep 2018 with practically no tread life left in the original Dunlops (4/32). The tires were original from first owner (I am 2nd), so they were getting close to being aged-out anyway.

For winter in Southern Ontario I put some Nokian Hakkapeliitta R3s 225/55R17 on steelies. All research said these were the best non-studded winter tire, full-stop. No brainer. Great traction for me in the winter. Definitely floaty when it got warm again (10C+).

For summer tires I did a lot of research. I was originally considering going "all the way" and getting Pilot Sport 4Ses. After much deliberation however, for the same cost as OE 225/45R19 Michelins I got some Firestone Indy 500s and newer, lighter 18" aftermarket rims instead. OE 19s are beautiful but very heavy (30lbs/rim). Mine were also bought curbed and peeling enough that it bothered me. Plus 19" ride is very harsh for potholes all over Toronto.

Anyway, I installed those Firestones in 235/45R18 today on my SuperSpeed RF03RRs 18x8.5 ET32. It is taking some getting used to the aesthetics of the 18" vs 19". Our cars looks best on 19s, I think, but the ride is excellent. These tires are LOUD compared with my old Dunlops however and even to my Nokians, which is funny considering the aggressive tread on winters makes them louder than A/S tires. The car however, handles like it is on rails... Rain performance is excellent as well. My Dunlops were very worn, but would squeal and spin in even "misty" red-light starts sometimes.. Full rain shower in the evening today and no confidence lost in these tires.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,656 Posts
Consider, for a start, the following data points. Many tire makers make parallel offerings of popular tires in their line, a performance tire and an AS line, which often have similar tread patterns and similar advertising copy. However, invariably — you will not find an exception — the performance tire will be significantly more expensive than the AS tire, and, again without exception, the AS tire will have a significantly higher UTQG Treadwear grade than the parallel performance tire. Stop. Think about that: Why does the tire maker think (apparently correctly, else it would stop making the performance variant) that it can charge more for a tire that is going to wear out more quickly? Simplified answer: the expensive variant is targeted at the driver who is concerned with safety, while the AS variant is targeted at drivers who are cheap and will cut corners to save a few dollars.
Baloney.

Nearly all tires start with the same physical (in fractions of an inch) of tread within a millimeter or two. All are legally worn out (at the wear bars) at 2/32. Most tires get nasty, especially on wet pavement, well before 2/32 and some get almost criminally loud as they wear as well.

Treadwear is almost entirely a function of the following:

1. Tread coverage. That is, what percentage of the contact patch is tread? The greater, all things being equal, the longer it wears. HOWEVER, the greater the coverage percentage (1) the less space is available to evacuate water and (2) the less "bite" it will have on snow. A "slick" would have the most wear in this situation but obviously would be completely unusable on the street as soon as it rained, so you can't get to the maximum. The balance is between wear and sufficient space to evacuate water. M+S rated tires should be expected to have *lower* treadwear ratings than non-M+S tires, all other things being equal.

2. Tread compound hardness. Softer wears faster. However, softer, all things being equal, has more traction. In addition, however, softer compounds also tend to have more rolling resistance (that is, lower fuel economy.) At higher temperatures, which are more common on dry pavement and under heavy braking stress on dry pavement this matters less because that stress (and just plain old fashion rolling resistance) gets the tires and tread quite warm in reasonable to hot temperatures. Water is a fabulous coolant compared to air so not only do you get less friction from the lubrication of the water you ALSO get a cooler tread which means it's harder; a double penalty. But -- you get more treadlife.

"Summer" tires are severely handicapped if you drive in colder temperatures. They are simply not suited to it, and in any sort of frozen precipitation -- even a dusting of snow -- they're downright dangerous. If you never go anywhere that has such precipitation and don't live in such a place then they're fine -- or if you have actual snow tires for the winter months.

Many places that get material amounts of snow have multiple "warning" categories for winter conditions and those carry equipment requirements to drive in same -- and they're routinely enforced with checkpoints. In some of those circumstances M+S tires are legal to use without chains but if you do not have M+S rated tires (or your tread is under 6/32) you must chain up instead. The "three peaks" symbol is even better but you will NOT find that on an A/S tire as the requirements to get it are incompatible with a tire that is suitable for hot driving conditions.

A/S isn't a legal definition. M+S (or M&S) is, and so is the "three peaks" (the newer one on most true winter tires, which is much more-stringent for snow traction.) Neither is the term "performance" or "Ultra-high performance."

And finally, as you note, the "test" for traction is not only synthetic it can't be achieved in the real world anymore since pretty-much any car made in at least the last 20 years has 4-wheel independent ABS and thus absent a malfunction in same it will not lock a wheel.

It would be nice if there was a consistent, standards-based "threshold braking" traction rating for both wet and dry traction, both with new tires and at the legal minimum tread level, not expressed as a letter grade but on a numerical scale, at full rated load and inflation (e.g. "G"s of braking force available.) That would be an objective rating and useful. There isn't, however; all you have is "traction", which is only wet, only one of a letter grade and that's not at legal minimum tread depth either. All tires SEVERELY degrade with wear in wet traction performance no matter how much you spend on them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
225/55R17 tires for 2014 Mazda 6 Sport

I have a 2014 Mazda 6 Sport with the 225/55R17 tires. I have read many posts about tires for the 3rd gen Mazda 6, but most of them are the 225/45R19 tires. While researching many tires, I have found out the speed ratings for the 17 inch and 19 inch tires within the same model, are sometimes different.


On the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 3+, the 17 and 19s even fall into different categories on Tire Rack.The 225/55R17 is a V rated, and falls into the High Performance A/S, while the 225/45R19 is a Y rated and falls into the Ultra High Performance A/S.


Therefore, I assume there are differences in how the 17s and 19s perform in the same model tire. None of the Tire Rack tests are on the 17 inch version of any of the models.



Could you 3rd gen Mazda 6 Sport owners with the 225/55R17 tires tell me what you are using, and how you feel about them. My current tires are at the wear bars, so I need to buy something soon.



Thanks in advance for any input you can give me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,656 Posts
Douglas Performance. Available at any WalMart in that size. Inexpensive and I like them plenty, especially for the money spent. V-rated on speed (faster than the "6" will ever go) and 97 load range (1609lbs rated load per wheel; the stock Advans are 95 which is 1521), made by Goodyear, what's not to like? Oh, and they're quite-acceptable in moderate snow too, much to my surprise (they ARE rated M+S, but I didn't expect them to be any good.) I wouldn't consider ANY so-called "A/S" tire for real snow use but for occasional incursions into frozen wastelands they'll do the job.

I'm on my second set; I wore the first set out but got over 50,000 miles out of them and they were around 4/32 at that point, which is where I change 'em. At my personal wear limit they were getting to the point that I considered them marginal on wet traction, especially over road features like painted "stop lines" but still perfectly fine dry, and while the noise level had gone up it wasn't ridiculous. They were even reasonably ok in *light snow* at 4/32! For $73 each? Uh, yeah, I'll buy those again -- and did.

That was behind the Advan's that came on the car (loud as hell but otherwise fine; they got annoying enough at about 30k miles I pulled 'em) and a set of BFG G-Force tires which were great when new, but got VERY loud and utterly horrid in any sort of condition that was even the slightest bit wet as they wore down.

BTW lest you think I'm a maniac the car has over 175,000 miles on it, so.... yeah.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
16,742 Posts
Douglas Performance. Available at any WalMart in that size. Inexpensive and I like them plenty, especially for the money spent. V-rated on speed (faster than the "6" will ever go) and 97 load range (1609lbs rated load per wheel; the stock Advans are 95 which is 1521), made by Goodyear, what's not to like? Oh, and they're quite-acceptable in moderate snow too, much to my surprise (they ARE rated M+S, but I didn't expect them to be any good.) I wouldn't consider ANY so-called "A/S" tire for real snow use but for occasional incursions into frozen wastelands they'll do the job.

I'm on my second set; I wore the first set out but got over 50,000 miles out of them and they were around 4/32 at that point, which is where I change 'em. At my personal wear limit they were getting to the point that I considered them marginal on wet traction, especially over road features like painted "stop lines" but still perfectly fine dry, and while the noise level had gone up it wasn't ridiculous. They were even reasonably ok in *light snow* at 4/32! For $73 each? Uh, yeah, I'll buy those again -- and did.

That was behind the Advan's that came on the car (loud as hell but otherwise fine; they got annoying enough at about 30k miles I pulled 'em) and a set of BFG G-Force tires which were great when new, but got VERY loud and utterly horrid in any sort of condition that was even the slightest bit wet as they wore down.

BTW lest you think I'm a maniac the car has over 175,000 miles on it, so.... yeah.
I just want to remind people here that ticker also does an incredible amount of driving and that most of it are fairly easy miles as opposed to those doing mostly city driving. Tires wear MUCH faster if they are only driven for short distances, especially in climates with fluctuating temperatures. If the rubber spends its life rapidly heating and cooling, rather than running warm for extended periods (highways), it's going to degrade at a much faster rate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,656 Posts
BTW the Douglas Performance tires outlasted the BFG Comp2/AS tires by about ~5,000 miles, so....

As for them being "easy miles" a huge percentage of those miles are southern and yes, highway, but in the summer those southern miles are on 100F+ pavement, which is pretty close to the worst possible environment for tires.

One BIG issue with tires of any sort is underinflation. Even a short amount of time with materially underinflated tires, especially when they get good and hot (e.g. on the highway in the summer) will ruin them due to overheating and it doesn't matter how much you paid for them originally. TPMS on my "6" has caught two screwings (both in the repairable area of the tread) thus far in the time I've owned the car and neither resulted in anything other than a $10 bill to get it fixed at the closest WallyWorld.

BTW for all those folks that love both Michelin and Uniroyal in the ~200k miles I drove my Jetta before giving it to my kid I had two belt separations and neither was due to abuse of any sort. Both were caught (it's REALLY obvious when it happens!) before the tire came apart and neither was underinflated nor was any external damage visible. One was on a Michelin MXV and the other on a Uniroyal TigerPaw. I won't buy anything made by either company anymore as while both were under warranty the warranty was worthless since both happened far enough away from somewhere that would honor it that I was forced to eat the cost; the only alternative would have been to haul the dead tire's carcass with me, on a trip, to somewhere they'd process it and honor the claim. Uh, no.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
679 Posts
If you think the Douglas tires are better than the others....



https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=douglas+performance+tires+review&view=detail&mid=9790CECCE9824E12EBCE9790CECCE9824E12EBCE&FORM=VIRE


I purchased these tires for a 2012 Hyundai Elantra. The tires are advertised as a 40k mile tire. The first set only lasted 15k miles tire pressure at 32PSI per Hyundai and rotated every 5k miles. Walmart replaced the tires at a pro-rated cost and stated that I shouldn't purchase the tires for this car again. The car has nothing to do with tire wear it's the junk tires they are selling with false advertisment. Now only a few months later and 10k miles Walmarts tire specialist stated they were going to decline to do the tire rotation due to tread wear. The car has no alignment or mechanical issues that would affect tire wear. I will never buy these tires again or any other Walmart tire. I do not recommend this tire.




bought a pair for the rear of my 2004 Pontiac. 11k and one of them split vertically on the sidewall. Garbage


I have 4 Douglas tire which seems every 3 to 4 weeks I have to add air. I soap the tires hopefully to find a leak.only have 8000. Miles on them. Very very disappointing. Tire look like new.Never buy them again.


These are just a few of the reviews found. Bottom line? there is no perfect tire. After "researching" I can say I would never put these on one of my auto's. YMMV but there are way more negative reviews than positive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,656 Posts
These are just a few of the reviews found. Bottom line? there is no perfect tire. After "researching" I can say I would never put these on one of my auto's. YMMV but there are way more negative reviews than positive.
Between my daughter's (formerly my) car -- 03 VW Jetta TDI and my Mazda 6 we have owned four sets of these tires thus far -- two sets of regular Douglas and two sets of Douglas Performance. There is little difference between them in price; the primary difference is the Performance series has an asymmetric tread pattern. The regular ones are a little quieter but not available in the 6 Sport's size.

Both vehicles currently have those tires on them.

Both wore out the previous set, each in approximately 50,000 miles.

The previous set on the Jetta were driven in the north (Michigan, to be exact) through half of a winter by my daughter. While I never recommend non-snow tires in "expected and regular" snow she did so and had no problems with traction and generally getting around.

We have had zero early failures, air leaks or other problems. Both sets are rotated on approximately 10,000 mile intervals by myself at the the time of oil changes.

If you read the reviews you will find several people who are complaining about leaks and early failures but who state they mounted their own tires. WalMart, quite-understandably, will refuse to honor the warranty if there's no evidence that the tires were properly mounted and balanced. To mount tires properly you need equipment that basically nobody has in their own garage; the proper gear to mount tires and seat the beads is decently-heavy machinery and expensive -- unless you're doing it for money there is exactly zero reason for anyone to own it and thus nobody realistically does. This means those people are 99% certain to have used "hillbilly" means to do so (e.g. ether used for beat seating, manual tire irons to lever the beads over the edge of the rims, etc.) Without the proper equipment it's very easy to damage beads, sidewalls or the sealing surfaces of the rim, specifically, while mounting a tire. It's also impossible to properly balance a tire without the correct equipment and an out-of-balance tire will wear unevenly and rapidly.

Tires do not leak air unless they've been holed. Ever. What leaks are the rims, beads (if damaged) or valve stems. If there is rim damage or the valve stem is bad it will leak. The tire itself has no places it CAN leak unless it has a hole in it or the bead has been damaged, in which case it's damaged and needs to either be repaired (if in the tread area) or replaced (if not.)

Curb damage will trash any tire. You may get away with it and you may not, but sidewall impacts have a good chance of doing severe damage, again, no matter how much money you spend. In addition if you allow a tire to run low on pressure, especially at high speed or in the summer you run the risk of excessive temperature damaging it internally -- and again, that has nothing to do with how much you spend.

The facts are that almost nobody who doesn't have a problem with a "pedestrian" product ever writes a review. If you buy a tire and it wears out in the expected amount of time the odds of you reviewing it approach zero.

Tires don't wear unevenly on their own either. They wear unevenly because they are not running properly on the ground, which is always and every time a problem with the suspension geometry on the vehicle or severe under or over-inflation (if the sides wear first or vice-versa.) Always.

Again there have been eight of these tires between two of my vehicles, in my garage, run from new to worn out and all performed as expected. There are now eight more; the Jetta has perhaps 20,000 miles on the new set, and I have about 10,000 on mine. I fully expect the Jetta to run about 30,000 more miles on that set (they will be rotated in the next few weeks as the car is coming up on an oil change interval) and I expect mine to last for about another 40,000 miles.

Absent something dramatic happening with either when they wear out there is a near-100% probability I'll buy them again, and likely a near 100% probability Sarah will as well.

You do what you want; I don't care if you want to pay 2-3x as much money for the same outcome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
679 Posts
I'm not going to dissect your post but there are more than a couple of "certainties" you claim that are simply not true. I posted the tip of the iceberg in regards to feedback. Their feedback is piss-poor. It is indeed a "cheap" tire and IMO there are better options FOR ME.



Believe me when I tell you I always do what it is I want to do. If I felt like the Douglas were superior tires I would buy them, I don't, just the same as many feel they are not, along with those that feel they are.


I would certainly never shake my head at someone because they don't feel/believe the same as I do. That's part of the free World thing....
 
21 - 33 of 33 Posts
About this Discussion
32 Replies
13 Participants
idrive
Mazda 6 Forums
Mazda6club.com is a forum dedicated to the Mazda6 / Atenza. Come and discuss reliability, performance, modifications, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top